It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...

Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...

mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...

Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...

There is a difference between quality d-men and a bunch of offensive and or hybrid d-men. You can only have so many of the latter two in any given lineup and expect to be successful (re: prevent goals).

Steve wrote:Mikey - thanks for all of the info. I don't understand at all (from others) how it can be a problem to have too many defensive prospects...I'm really looking forward to watching these guys develop, to see how they pan out. I'll definately be paying more attention than I have in the past, with our prospects...

Anyway, my only concern would be if too many of these guys ended up in the same place at the same time - say Wilkes-Barre, where you'd have trouble carving up ice time in key situations for all of them. I haven't looked into this, but I'm assuming that's not an issue now, since they will be spread out in juniors, college etc. Do you see this as an issue at all?

I was thinking about that too, but its not a realistic problem. The way its shaping up now, we won't be seeing more than 4 of them there at any given time. 4 or less and its a non-issue.

mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...

Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...

I agree about our weak D which is why I can't see why we only seem to be going after forwards. If we are not going after any FA D men, I think we should just stand pat (save the cap space) and see what happens with our young D men. Plenty of time for trades before the deadline.

mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...

Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...

There is a difference between quality d-men and a bunch of offensive and or hybrid d-men. You can only have so many of the latter two in any given lineup and expect to be successful (re: prevent goals).

Again, I don't disagree. This wasn't a crystal ball look...this was a "look, no one is injured because we drafted 'too many' d-men."

I enjoyed reading your posts but I think they are just slightly off half topic. And by that (and responding to one earlier post about people complaining we have too many defensive prospects) I mean its not about how many we have, when they can come up and what will the 6 pairing look like.

The issue and argument back to that is what will the other 67% of the lineup look like?

In your estimation on arrival time it would have to assumes that:a. They all develop into pros.....andb. We sign 10 - 12 guys as FA's to play forward. Maybe a few more.

And that is my issue with this. And even (as ALMOST EVERYONE HAS ARGUED BACK) if we are developing some to trade its not clean cut even if your timeline is correct. People are not going to give up valuable forwards for unproven defensemen. So we have by estimation a problem if in a year or two the only one we can trade is Despres while hoping the other guys are on track, and still have Orpik and Letang as FA's.

Everyone counting on trades and FA's doesnt have a great memory. While Shero has done well and I am not complaining, its not every time everything works out. If 3 of these d-men dont work out and you trade one that does work out away in a ok trade, one in negative trade and one in a great one, develop 3 into puck moving quality players...... it still means the entire thing was a failure if that was the plan.

We would have 1, maybe 2 forwards to show for it and 3 puck moving guys getting pushed around come playoff time. All because stockpiled and clearly counted on FA's to restock the forward shelf.

Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...

We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.

Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...

I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?

I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...

mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...

We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.

Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...

I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?

I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...

Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace? I mean we have ZERO prospects and will have 3 guys signed in 2 years and one RFA. Its just silly to me that someone would say to focus on what we have because forwards are easy to find and easy to replace?

That is 67% of the roster and 30 other teams with an exact cap ceiling and probably more cap room looking to fill out their roster.

I mean everyone keeps sighting Neal but should I just ignore next season? Should we ignore all the forwards we brought in or we traded for who sucked? Al the FA's that didnt work out, not just with us, across the board?

This all just seems wild to me that everyone is ok because we can just find or trade for 67% of our roster.

Ok, I'm getting very confused now because you're speaking in hyperbole and it's confusing and muddling the issue...

Let's just take a breath here for a second...ok, now just nice and easy, what is your concern for next season? What do you think is going to happen? Reasonably and realistically...what is going to happen that you are in such a panic about?

I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.

mikey287 wrote:Ok, I'm getting very confused now because you're speaking in hyperbole and it's confusing and muddling the issue...

Let's just take a breath here for a second...ok, now just nice and easy, what is your concern for next season? What do you think is going to happen? Reasonably and realistically...what is going to happen that you are in such a panic about?

For next season alone? Kunitz is on the downsideDupuis exposed in the playoffsNo 2nd line LWCooke wasnt effective in a 3rd line role (eveyrone just mentions his goals)TK - wasnt effective in a 3rd line roleSuter will be ok for Staal on a 3rd line, except if Crosby or Malkin go down he cant fill in like Staal didAdamsViatle or Jeffrey or Tangradi

Orpik exposedMichalek gone and he was our only slightly normal defensive d-men.

We are worse than last season at every spot other than the few we are equal at......with no forward help to come up and no defense in the system ready except maybe one. Since 2008 there should have been some forwards ready to play by now and no d-men to trade for another 2 years.

Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.

No, if you really read what I wrote I was pointing out that they ignored a position that counts 67% of your roster (meaning skaters). I wasnt referring to how many we already had signed. You dont draft goalies more there here or there or even every few drafts.

Just by dumb math if you need to fill out 67% of your roster with forwards you think you would want a few of them in the system.

And honestly your math doesnt account for d-men we have signed to similar for the near future, so in reality for the near future we need to fill out about 73% of our roster if you go by open spots.

And you cant count guys who are "going to fill in", thats kind of the point of the open spots.

Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.

No, if you really read what I wrote I was pointing out that they ignored a position that counts 67% of your roster (meaning skaters). I wasnt referring to how many we already had signed. You dont draft goalies more there here or there or even every few drafts.

Just by dumb math if you need to fill out 67% of your roster with forwards you think you would want a few of them in the system.

And honestly your math doesnt account for d-men we have signed to similar for the near future, so in reality for the near future we need to fill out about 73% of our roster if you go by open spots.

And you cant count guys who are "going to fill in", thats kind of the point of the open spots.

I agree they need more of them in the system, but that is not the reason. You can ignore what they have all you want, but the reality is that they have 4 important forward spots on the NHL roster that they control for quite a while...barring Malkin's Soviet brainwashing kicking in.

and how many times are you going to contradict yourself? Are you adding in the defensive positions now? Thats not an issue, as thats the strength in their system, I thought you were arguing that you want the team to be able to backfill from other levels of the organization. I don't understand what you are arguing at all.

Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.

No, if you really read what I wrote I was pointing out that they ignored a position that counts 67% of your roster (meaning skaters). I wasnt referring to how many we already had signed. You dont draft goalies more there here or there or even every few drafts.

Just by dumb math if you need to fill out 67% of your roster with forwards you think you would want a few of them in the system.

And honestly your math doesnt account for d-men we have signed to similar for the near future, so in reality for the near future we need to fill out about 73% of our roster if you go by open spots.

And you cant count guys who are "going to fill in", thats kind of the point of the open spots.

I agree they need more of them in the system, but that is not the reason. You can ignore what they have all you want, but the reality is that they have 4 important forward spots on the NHL roster that they control for quite a while...barring Malkin's Soviet brainwashing kicking in.

and how many times are you going to contradict yourself? Are you adding in the defensive positions now? Thats not an issue, as thats the strength in their system, I thought you were arguing that you want the team to be able to backfill from other levels of the organization. I don't understand what you are arguing at all.

I never contradicted myself, I was pointing out in the math that you cant count signed forwards on the roster without counting signed d-men for the purpose of saying what % we need to fill, which is what you did, but if you did it that way but included both the % of forward needed to fill actually increased. Sorry, didnt know my 67% was that much of a stretch or hard to comprehend.

And I understand what we have in signed forwards. With no prospects and and $26 - $27 million tied up in 4 forwards we will have no cheap options on entry level contracts to help fill out the roster for 3 -4 years. We are going to settle, not have depth and its going to cost us. See: 2012 playoffs.

Personally, I need a little more to go on than just "insert penguin not named Crosby or Malkin" got "exposed." ??? What does that mean exactly? I can say for certainty after watching the pens/flyers series that both Crosby and Malkin were embarrassed defensively by the hard work of the Flyers forecheckers. I don't know if that's "exposed," but it was certainly real...and quite frustrating.

mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...

We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.

Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...

I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?

I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...

As far as drafting 3rd liners, well Malkin lead the team/league in scoring with Fedotenko/Talbot (two 3rd liners, arguably) With paying 2 centers big money you're going to have to play a 3rd liner with them. Before Dupuis broke out this year to another level I would have considered him a 3rd liner. Just saying...

I like how you're putting so much faith into Marcantuoni. First off I love it, honestly. I agree that Uher looks promising as well. Personally I think Bennett will be a bust but I did hear he's over 200 lbs which is huge for his development.

mikey287 wrote:Ok, I'm getting very confused now because you're speaking in hyperbole and it's confusing and muddling the issue...

Let's just take a breath here for a second...ok, now just nice and easy, what is your concern for next season? What do you think is going to happen? Reasonably and realistically...what is going to happen that you are in such a panic about?

For next season alone? Kunitz is on the downsideDupuis exposed in the playoffsNo 2nd line LWCooke wasnt effective in a 3rd line role (eveyrone just mentions his goals)TK - wasnt effective in a 3rd line roleSuter will be ok for Staal on a 3rd line, except if Crosby or Malkin go down he cant fill in like Staal didAdamsViatle or Jeffrey or Tangradi

Orpik exposedMichalek gone and he was our only slightly normal defensive d-men.

We are worse than last season at every spot other than the few we are equal at......with no forward help to come up and no defense in the system ready except maybe one. Since 2008 there should have been some forwards ready to play by now and no d-men to trade for another 2 years.

mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...

We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.

Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...

I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?

I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...

As far as drafting 3rd liners, well Malkin lead the team/league in scoring with Fedotenko/Talbot (two 3rd liners, arguably) With paying 2 centers big money you're going to have to play a 3rd liner with them. Before Dupuis broke out this year to another level I would have considered him a 3rd liner. Just saying...

I like how you're putting so much faith into Marcantuoni. First off I love it, honestly. I agree that Uher looks promising as well. Personally I think Bennett will be a bust but I did hear he's over 200 lbs which is huge for his development.

I understand injuries. But again, drafting a forward in 2012 doesn't help injuries anyway...Shero has always done a good job of having NHL ready talent in the ranks...even if they're AHL vets like Williams and McDonald from last year, they can still fill in for a few games...

So because Malkin was awesome with clowns like Fedotenko and Talbot, we should draft them in the first round? That doesn't make any sense to me at all...

Dupuis has had one season in his career where he scored more than his static career production numbers would indicate...

Salary Cap will ensure Crosby or Malkin are always playing with at least 1 3rd line talent.

We can win cups with 3rd liners. It's just we still haven't had a defense as good as the cup year. Maybe it will have to wait until some of these youngsters are in the NHL for a few years until we win another =/